Following in the footsteps of Marty Schwimmer and Dennis Kennedy, I shall try a weekly post aggregating selected IP “tweets”. If you’re keen on greater currency, my tweets also show up as they’re made in a side bar on the website. RT @priorsmart: RT @ernestgrumbles Is the Fed. Circuit pro-patent? Maybe Not http://bit.ly/Kd9gR (empirical study of decisions) RT @dhowell: RT @entlawupdate How the RealDVD ruling could reshape copyright law http://bit.ly/2sud8B.. Read More
Marty (The Trademark Blog) extracts from the 11th Circuit’s ruling in Davidoff v CVS, where the parallel importer was found liable for infringement by removing the UPC codes (which, of course, are not put there to detect parallel import leaks, but in case of product recall requirements). He appends the text of the decision. Off the top of my head, I don’t think that argument would help Davidoff down here.. Read More
According to the IPKat, the ECJ has introduced an EU-wide law of unfair competition/tarnishment for registered trade marks in L’Oreal v Bellure. Read more
IP Australia has released 3 further consultation papers on “IP Rights Reforms”: resolving divisional applications faster resolving patent oppositions faster resolving trade mark oppositions faster Submissions are sought by 17 August 2009. Download the papers (pdf or .doc) from here. There are also links to the earlier papers on ‘Getting the Balance Right’ and ‘Exemptions to Patent Infringement’.
Lea Lewin looks at why Virgin lost its opposition (in the Office) to Qantas‘ attempt to register ALL DAY, EVERY DAY, LOW FARES in the face of Virgin’s ‘trade mark’ for: EVERY DAY LOW FARES Unfortunately, Virgin’s ‘trade mark’ doesn’t exactly leap off its website (or the evidence it filed). Given Qantas is on the verge of registration (and apparently using its ‘mark’ through Jetstar), I can see why Virgin.. Read More
Yesterday (in the USA) Google’s new trade mark policy and complaint procedure came into force. All the details here. Australia is still in the regions where both text and keywords are monitored. Lid dip @TrademarkBlog (aka Marty Schwimmer)
Prof. Mark Davison reviews Bennett J’s recent decision allowing Pioneer, by an exercise of discretion, to keep its registration for , even though it had no use of, or intention to use, the trade mark in respect of those goods. Pioneer Computers Australia Pty Limited v Pioneer KK  FCA 135
The World Trademark Review has issued a call for nominations for its industry awards. The nominations are sought for in-house trade mark lawyers and departments. Further details here and last year’s awards here (pdf). Have your say (nomination form) here.
Not only did E & J Gallo fail in its infringement action against Lion Nathan’s Barefoot Radler mark for beer, but Lion Nathan successfully applied to get E & J Gallo’s trade mark removed for non-use. Various grounds were advanced to support the use of the trade mark. The surprising thing about this second part of the case, however, is that wine labelled with E & J Gallo’s trade mark.. Read More
For those of you wondering what Google Chrome is all about, David Pogue does an excellent review and Google, of course, has pretty good explanatory materials including a comic. Something your brand owners may want to start thinking about is the new monoline address/search bar: you type in a word and Chrome starts suggesting a range of alternatives. See an example and watch the video here. Nothing to worry about,.. Read More